Scottish Independence: The non-Scotsmans Verdict Im not Scottish, but I lived there for 8 years, voted in the 1997 referendum, and care about it. As a few friends have asked for my views, here is my EUR 0.02: 1. From and English point of view, It would solve the West Lothian question, whereby Scottish MPs get to vote on England and Wales only legislation even in areas where the Scottish Parliament has competence in Scotland. It would also stop UK governments’ majorities being sustained by Scottish MPs (although this is much rarer than people seem to think). 2. The historic systems and cultures are divergent enough to warrant it. Education and legal systems are different of course, but attitudes are also very different. Scotland is overwhelmingly pro-EU, while I think there’s a very real chance that the UK as a whole will vote to leave the EU; Scotland is less scared of immigration than rUK, particularly from within the EU; despite being massively over-represented in the armed forces, public support for military interventions in the last 10-15 years has been much lower than in the rUK; Scotland supports the Human Rights act whereas public opinion in rUK seems to be against it etc., etc. 3. Oil and gas. This will run out sooner or later, and the UK is pretty much the only nation to have used oil and gas revenues as they are received, rather than building a sovereign wealth fund for the transition when it does run out. Norway’s Oil Fund is worth nearly USD 900 billion, and owns one percent of the world’s equity markets. The UK has no plans to start such a fund, but it is very likely that an independent Scotland would. 4. The Uncertainty con. Yes, there is a lot of uncertainty involved in setting up a whole new state, but not nearly as much as has been put around. Scotland on day one would have a full set of fully functioning legislation already in place as it would no doubt keep existing legislation for a transition period. This, incidentally, would be fully compatible with EU legislation, as it is now. 5. The Pound. Maybe not the right person to ask, as in the long-term I think we should all join the Euro. However, the idea that rUK would deliberately try to cripple the Scottish economy by actively trying to stop it using Sterling is crazy. One argument is that, if there was no currency union, the Bank of England would be making monetary policy for Scotland without Scotland’s involvement and without taking account of Scotland. Well, how much account do you think they currently take of Scotland, or, for that matter, any part of the UK other than the South East and the City? Can’t imagine those monetary policy committee minutes having had much specific mention of Scotland, can you? 6. The EU. Spain has already said it would not block Scotland. Oli Rehn said the other day that it would have to join the Euro, but that’s a) not the full story as many others have not, and joining the ERM is both voluntary and a precondition for joining the Euro; and b) irrelevant as Oli Rehn is no longer a Commissioner. Joining would be potentially costly, and something of a faff. Scotland would not be a successor nation to the UK, but a new nation, so would have to apply and join. The process does therefore mean further uncertainty. However, as Scotland currently implements all parts of the EU acquis (body of law and rules), and would set up institutions specifically to comply with EU rules, it should be easily possible, probably within the 18 month timeframe. 7. Devo Max/Plus etc. This would actually have been my preferred option. However, all UK parties have had since 1997 to propose this and have failed. Cameron specifically refused to accept a devo-max question on the referendum because he knew it would win, and he was arrogantly certain of a No vote, after which he could dictate terms. They are now shitting themselves that there’ll be a yes vote and trying to buy the population off pretty shoddily with a promise of Devo Max. You pay your money and you takes your chance. 8. Investment. So, the pound fell a bit when the polls showed a ‘yes’ lead. Does this mean that companies will be leaving Scotland in their droves? The experience of other newly independent countries would actually suggest that a new country, with all of its juicy new contracts to hand out, would lead to something of a feeding frenzy as investors look to get in at the ground floor in a new market. You have a nominal GDP per capita roughly the same as Belgium and Germany’s (around USD 45,000), so its hard to imagine investors ignoring you. I’ve tried to make the previous points none-emotive, but there has to be some emotion about the fate of a nation, so here we go: 9. Speaking as a North Easterner, the fact is that Westminster parties and leaders simply don’t give a shit about the North or Scotland. They look down on us (and you) with arrogant derision. They joke about how you can’t get along without them, you you’re trouble makers all stuffing yourself with deep fried Mars Bars and living off benefits, how you have a big chip on your shoulder about your ‘culture’, while they get on with the serious work, politically and economically. You have the chance to make that irrelevant by going it alone, and massively reducing the influence that they have on you. I wish the North East could do the same, but it doesn’t qualify due to the reasons above (i.e. not being a country) and, bizarrely, ruined the move towards English regionalism by voting against a regional assembly. 10. Finally, Why not? You have one chance in a Century to have complete control over your history, over the fate of your nation. You are very unlikely to get another chance. Hardly any country in history has managed independence without violence. This is not about hating or blaming someone else, but about controlling your own destiny. Don’t you really want to find out, even just a little bit, what it would be like?
Posted on: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:10:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015